Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Colorado’s “high-cap” magazine ban would essentially ban all magazines

I noted at the time of the hearings that one takeaway from watching the House assembly debates is that Rhonda Fields, one of the sponsors of this mess of anti-2nd Amendment bills, may just be one of the stupidest legislators in the history of ever — a puppet being used because of her tragic past.

I also noted that it seemed to me the Democrats, with one or two exceptions who broke ranks, were absolutely immune to facts, logic, and common sense — and so what we were watching weren’t “debates” at all.

This process was repeated in the Senate.

What the CO high-cap ban does, should Governor Hickenlooper (who is the bobblehead doll on the dash of Bloomberg’s limo) sign it, is create the scenario in which, should the bill be interpreted literally and broadly, using plain language, rather than narrowly, would ban any magazine with a removable base plate, all of which would be capable of being extended past fifteen rounds, making them illegal under the law.

And because there is no way to prove when a traditional magazine was purchased short of finding and carrying old receipts with you, you are essentially operating at the whim of law enforcement.

That is a police state.

I can’t help but feel that this was a kind of test case for getting that language approved and signed into law; and that the more savvy national Democrats who were pulling the strings knew exactly what they were doing in helping the Colorado Democrats conceive of these bills.

(h/t John B)

52 Replies to “Colorado’s “high-cap” magazine ban would essentially ban all magazines”

  1. JohnInFirestone says:

    The Caldara Video referenced by 9 News.

  2. geoffb says:

    were absolutely immune to facts, logic, and common sense — and so what we were watching weren’t “debates” at all.

    Connecticut too.

    Connecticut’s courant.com reports, “lawmakers started to grow weary. During a testimony from Matt Powell of Manchester, Rep. Minnie Gonzalez, D-Hartford, [below] said she felt he was threatening her and other lawmakers . . .

    “I don’t know what’s going to happen with this bill, but right now I’m saying that I don’t think that it’s fair if we give you guys the opportunity to come here and express yourself because at the end of the day we’re going to make this decision and maybe you’ll like it, maybe you won’t,” she said. “If you guys don’t like us, then you vote against us.”

    In New York they didn’t even do a show of listening, it was just “Ram-Bam-Fuck-You-Man.”

  3. cranky-d says:

    Is it good or bad that they don’t even pretend to represent us?

  4. LBascom says:

    We are fast moving away from having inalienable rights under the constitution, to a rule of law where anything not expressly permitted by law is prohibited.

    The revolution can’t be far off…

  5. William says:

    The problem with dismantling your house before starting to build the one you promise will be better…

  6. geoffb says:

    Back in February, the NRA unveiled a document … the National Institute of Justice (part of the Justice Department) had analyzed the most prominent proposed new federal gun laws, and found that most of them would accomplish little or nothing, unless accompanied by additional restrictions, far more draconian than the administration dares (for now) to admit seeking.
    […]
    “[U]niversal background checks” (a “universal” ban of private sales, in other, more honest words), the NIJ memo found little reason to hope for much effect, unless the measure were combined with universal registration.

    Likewise, banning so-called “assault weapons” will have little effect, according to the NIJ memo, partly because such firearms are used in such a miniscule percentage of violent crime, to the extent that NIJ says that even “a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.” Then, though, the memo claims that a ban, if coupled with a “buyback” (a mandatory “buyback,” with “no exemptions”–i.e., no “grandfather clause”), “could be effective.”

    And now to “high capacity” magazines … As with so-called “assault weapons,” NIJ thinks that “grandfathered” magazines would spoil the effect of the entire ban:

    An exemption for previously owned magazines would nearly eliminate any impact. The program would need to be coupled with an extensive buyback of existing large capacity magazines.
    […]
    Illinois State Representative Mike Zalewski (D) … agrees. His Amendment #10 to … HB 1156, would both ban 11-round and larger magazines, and demand that heretofore legally owned ones be surrendered, on pain of at least a Class A misdemeanor.

    And that’s how Zalewski says it has to be, according to the Illinois Review:

    “There can be no grandfather clause on this,” he said to those requesting an amendment, “because there are no identity numbers on these clips.” If he allowed grandfathering the magazines, he said he would lose votes from those from which he had already garnered support.
    […]
    In voting Wednesday, the amendment fell short–but just barely, at 57 in favor and 59 opposed. Yesterday was apparently spent twisting arms trying to get those last three votes, and that effort is certainly not over. And Zalewski made clear that his hatred for gun owners has not abated an iota:

    “After all the talk, there’s nothing that’s been said today that would incline me to change the wording,” Zalewski said. “I will not pull this amendment.”

    Of course nothing said by opponents of the bill changed his mind. They only had facts, logic, and decency on their side. Those mean nothing to Zalewski.

  7. eCurmudgeon says:

    Governor Hickenlooper (who is the bobblehead doll on the dash of Bloomberg’s limo)

    Or, as I’ve taken to call him: Governor Moonbeam, Jr.

  8. Swen says:

    The burden of proof still lies with the state — can they prove that you acquired the magazine after the date of the ban? Drive to Wyoming, pay cash, and they can’t prove shit. You already owned the weapon, you already owned standard capacity magazines without their silly date stamp, what are they going to do?

  9. sdferr says:

    What are they going to do? At a guess, seize your property, then dare you to take them to court over your goods (with what monetary value?), making the individual pay for the court twice, once in his individual representation at law, and the second time for the State’s lawyers through paying taxes.

  10. leigh says:

    I’m almost sure they can do whatever they like, as per Geoff’s post at 5:00.

    There is only the chimera of the USC and our States’ Constitutions, now.

  11. Pablo says:

    The burden of proof still lies with the state — can they prove that you acquired the magazine after the date of the ban?

    That’s at trial. Prior to that, the process is the punishment. How much would you like to bet that a condition of your bail once charged under this law will be that you disarm? All of your firearms, perhaps?

  12. leigh says:

    I was listing scenarios in my head and this is all kinds of fucked up.

  13. 11B40 says:

    Greetings:

    A decade or two ago, there was a bit of commotion in the law enforcement industry. It seems that its employees (as opposed to its clients) were concerned about those same clients having superior weaponry to our (non-Air Force) boys in blue. The discussion centered on the government-supplied revolvers versus those new-fangled (semi) automatic pistols. The increased capability of the latter in terms of both rate of fire and ammunition capacity (10+ rounds) put the sworn officers of the law in distinctly dangerous situation which was shortly on the road to correction.

    So, it seems to what’s left of the rational part of my brain, how is it that what’s good for police officers is so bad, dangerous, unnecessary, inhuman for less unordinary citizens. If we have known since then that criminals had those weapons, why now are our rulers trying to under-arm the citizenry. Is the danger not similar, comparable ???

  14. Swen says:

    Well, yeah, they can always torture you with various un-provable charges and quite likely bankrupt you defending yourself, but they can do that with any of the however many bazillion laws they have in effect. Welcome to the New World Order.

    But check this out! Is that cool or what?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=1pYqquG27pg

  15. newrouter says:

    What sort of people were these? What were they talking about? What office did they belong to? K. was living in a free country, after all, everywhere was at peace, all laws were decent and were upheld, who was it who dared accost him in his own home?

  16. JayG says:

    Jeff,
    In stock again at MGW, the link I supplied in the other thread comment section. Get ’em quick.

  17. JayG says:

    Good god, after I wrote the above message, I was writing you an email and as I checked the status again, they were sold out. This happened last time MGW got some in; as they went thru orders, they put mags back in the que as they disallowed duplicate orders. Keep checking in on their website if you don’t want the ones I offered in the other thread comment section. You may still get some tonight.

  18. beemoe says:

    You guys that think the burden of proof lies with the state need to read up on property laws and the war on drugs.

  19. Swen says:

    beemoe says March 15, 2013 at 8:35 pm
    You guys that think the burden of proof lies with the state need to read up on property laws and the war on drugs.

    Or just ask George Zimmerman what happens when the powers that be decide to hang you out to dry.

  20. The Monster says:

    Many years ago, I was one of a group of merchants who met with city planning commission staff about a proposed ordinance governing signs. I pointed out that the language would have required a city permit for the sticker that says “PUSH” on one side and “PULL” on the other. A staffer responded “That is not the intent of the ordinance.” I followed up: “Then will you change the wording to reflect the intent?” The answer to that, of course, was “No.”

    They always want overbroad language that gives “discretion” to the enforcers. That way they know they can always write you up for a bunch of technical violations of their rules if they don’t like what you’re doing. And they can also show restraint when dealing with their friends, who of course intend to do good.

  21. Dalekhunter says:

    Oh gosh, sorry to butt in but http://youtu.be/PGfCX9sJqqc
    Breaking! slavery defended at CPAC
    #Cruz’16

  22. geoffb says:

    Another “well written” bill that has many hidden Easter eggs. Chuck Schumer’s S. 374.

  23. Kevin says:

    “the more savvy national Democrats who were pulling the strings knew exactly what they were doing in helping the Colorado Democrats conceive of these bills.”

    Or maybe a conservative snuck that line in to make sure the supreme court would find the law unconstitutional?

  24. Pablo says:

    Oh gosh, sorry to butt in

    Then don’t.

    Breaking! slavery defended at CPAC

    You really need to stop reading Think Progress. That shit will rot your already degraded brain.

  25. You guys that think the burden of proof lies with the state need to read up on property laws and the war on drugs.

    One of the arguments that shied me away from the Libertarian Party was that if you weren’t for full drug legalization you must be for asset forfeiture.

    It didn’t matter how often I corrected them; in their minds the two were irretrievably linked.

    These days I’ve been wondering if they weren’t right after all.

  26. sdferr says:

    Notice it’s a proponent of the enslavement of doctors (since he inveighs against a health care institution which works for profit), and indeed, himself a self-made slave to an enslaving political movement who comes here to introduce a lie in the service of his own enslavement and his enslaving political movement. *It’s good to be a drone,* says our visiting fascist, both by word and deed.

  27. LBascom says:

    What I noticed is the white pride guy went to that event as an agitator, and DaleKhunt implied he was there as a representative of the event.

    It’s because Dalekhunt is a liar, and worse, unashamed to be so.

  28. Pablo says:

    If you weren’t such a racist you’d be happy to be a slave!

  29. geoffb says:

    Another more complete report on the “Look Bunnies” LoFo hijack attempt.

    It is clear that both Heimbach and Terry attended CPAC with the intention of causing a stir and offending people as they openly admit that they dislike the GOP establishment and the conservative conference.

  30. Merovign says:

    All you can do right now is agitate like hell, tell people who don’t know, do what you can to drag the assholes into court.

    And for those of you in red states laughing, California used to be a red state, and 41% of Texas voters chose Obama. You’re next.

    We need to fight this *everywhere* because it spreads like political VD.

  31. geoffb says:

    Rats growing. Dirty rats that lied to win now come out from the mask.

  32. Jeff G. says:

    Oh gosh, sorry to butt in but http://youtu.be/PGfCX9sJqqc
    Breaking! slavery defended at CPAC
    #Cruz’16

    This is precisely what willing slaves like Dalekhunter do: carry water for propagandists, hoping it sticks. If it does, good. If not, he’ll try the next bullshit line of attack.

    Which is why from no on, every time Dalekhunter comments here, he needs to be asked if he retracts the suggestion that people looking to taint conservatism intentionally are in fact its representatives.

    Because if not, he owes us all an apology.

    What are the chances of him manning up? Of doubling down?

    I know where I’d place my bet.

  33. LBascom says:

    “The United States is steadfast in its commitment to achieve a strong and effective Arms Trade Treaty that helps address the adverse effects of the international arms trade on global peace and stability,” Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement Friday. . . .

    That’s pretty funny shit right there, considering F&F and the arming of Libyan and Syrian Islamist rebels.

  34. geoffb says:

    There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.

    They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.

    Been down this road once before with Clinton in the mid 90s.

  35. leigh says:

    I’m getting more than a little tired of this. That Christianist crap chaps my hide. As if anyone who is a follower of Christ is a zealot.

  36. geoffb says:

    Not sure if this part was in the video above.

    Now that HB 1224 has been amended and passed by both houses of the Colorado legislature, a line in the bill that would effectively ban all magazines with a removable floorplate is finally being noticed. And the bill’s primary sponsor Rep. Rhonda Fields (D-Aurora) is not only not concerned about that but fully supports the broad interpretation of the law.
    […]
    She also suggested that people could either get existing non-convertible 10 round magazines or that manufacturers would make 15 round magazines for sale in Colorado.

    She is a real piece of work.

  37. geoffb says:

    In Boulder a gun store does a giveaway of hi-cap magazines in return for contributions to a gun rights group. 100 magazines gone in less than 20 minutes.

    Across the street is a protest of the giveaway by what is described as “dozens” and as “about 100”. The protest of gun rights was organized by “Together Colorado, a multi-denominational group of Boulder-area clergy ” with spokes-person Sheila Dierks. “Together Colorado” is part of the PICO Network which is one of the large progressive left umbrella organizations along Gamaliel and whatever ACORN is now called.

    Sheila Dierks is a priest. A “Catholic priest” of sorts. She was ordained into “The Ecumenical Catholic Communion ” a group which broke away from the Roman Catholic Church in 2003 becoming the progressive left’s perfect church.

    “You don’t have to be Roman to be Catholic,” said Scott Jenkins, pastor of 125-member Holy Family, the ECC anchor church in Colorado. It’s in a storefront of an Aurora strip mall.

    His congregation is made up of “people who, at their core, care about social justice. They miss Catholic spirituality. They don’t miss some of the rules and regulations of Rome’s church.”

    The ECC ordains women and excludes no one — not the divorced, gay, lesbian or transgendered — from the sacraments of ordination, marriage, baptism, the Holy Eucharist, confirmation, confession and anointing of the sick.

    Priests can marry. The divorced can marry again in the ECC without an annulment.

    The ECC further holds that family planning is a matter of personal conscience. Church authority resides jointly with clergy and laity.

    The Catholic Archdiocese of Denver said the ECC’s sacraments are not valid.

  38. beemoe says:

    It would seem to me anyone with a working brain would view that video and judge from the reaction that all the other CPAC participants were shocked and dismayed by this buffoon.

    Too bad thinkprogress and dalek don’t have working brains I guess.

  39. Silver Whistle says:

    It would seem to me anyone with a working brain would view that video and judge from the reaction that all the other CPAC participants were shocked and dismayed by this buffoon.
    Too bad thinkprogress and dalek don’t have working brains I guess.

    What dale khunter is endorsing is the view that any heckler at any event represents the organiser of said event. Great idea! Let’s run with it.

  40. SBP says:

    Being in the same room with a racist audience member implies that you are a racist.

    Attending a racist church for 20 years does not.

    It’s the reality-based way of looking at things, dontcha know?

  41. daveinsocal says:

    Colorado sheriffs: Sorry, but these new gun laws would be kind of unenforceable

    Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said he won’t enforce either gun-control measure waiting to be signed into law by Gov. John Hickenlooper, saying the laws are “unenforceable” and would “give a false sense of security.” …

    Cooke is joined in his opposition to the proposals by El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa, who told an angry packed crowd at a meeting on Thursday in Colorado Springs he would stand firm against the bills.

    “I can’t tell you when those were sold, bought and purchased. As far as I’m concerned, they were all pre-July 1 if the governor does sign this bill,” he said.
    […]
    Maketa said the proposed laws were hastily crafted and at least one would be unenforceable. A number of Colorado sheriffs are concerned the laws could lead to registration of gun owners, he said.

  42. happyfeet says:

    National Soros Radio says there’s this guy what got killed with a gun

    So that changes the complexion of the debate about the constitution and stuff.

  43. Jeff G. says:

    John Cooke is my Sheriff. He’s awesome. We’re well-represented out here. My Rep brought in John Lott to speak, and my Senator said she wouldn’t abide the mag ban law.

  44. LBascom says:

    Meanwhile, over here in the Socialist Republic of California, Thousands Line Up Outside Cal Expo Gun Show To Buy Ammunition.

  45. daveinsocal says:

    Jeff, we seem to have a decent Sheriff here in Riverside county. He even sent a surprisingly good letter to DiFi opposing her new AWB bill and firmly supporting 2A rights. Not bad for the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia.
    However, I’m not nearly as worried about Congress passing 2A restrictions at the Federal level as I am about CA’s new Democrat gun-grabbing supermajority state legislature passing new laws to make our already onerous state restrictions even worse. Like SB-374, which reclassifies all semiautomatic centerfire AND rimfire rifles without a fixed magazine of 10 rounds or fewer as “assault weapons”. Great. Which would turn an ordinary Ruger 10/22 into one of those evil “assault rifles”. Or SB-47, which would lump semiautomatic pistols into the classification of “assault weapons”.

    And to think, I used to believe 10 round mag limits and “bullet buttons” were bad.

  46. daveinsocal says:

    Meanwhile, over here in the Socialist Republic of California, Thousands Line Up Outside Cal Expo Gun Show To Buy Ammunition.

    Well, you’re sure as hell not going to find boxes of 9mm, .223, 5.56 or 22LR by strolling into your neighborhood gun store or Wal-Mart like you used to be able to do right up until the morning of December 14, 2012.

  47. leigh says:

    .223 and .22LR on the shelves here in Wal-Mart.

    We have lots of wide open spaces and great fishing and hunting, too.

    Where are you moving to, Lee?

  48. Ernst Schreiber says:

    .223 and .22LR on the shelves here in Wal-Mart.

    Don’t let the “ma-n-pop” gunstore owners find out.

  49. leigh says:

    Heh. They have it too. And defensive ammo.

    We have responsible gun owners here, you see. Plus our congresscritters trust us.

  50. LBascom says:

    Leigh, I’m moving about a mile up the hill from where I live now. Yup, I bought a house in California. It is, however, about the reddest place in the state. The nearest town, 14 miles away, is the only town in the state that endorsed prop 8.

    As for ammo, there’s nothing to be had but shotgun shells anywhere. I put in an order for a couple hundred .30-.30 rounds through Cabella’s last December, got an emil saying they hoped to fill it by the end of January, another hoping for February 28, and a week ago I got an email saying my order was cancelled.

    Now that’s gun control…

  51. Yup, I bought a house in California. It is, however, about the reddest place in the state.

    Inyo County? I doubt Jerry Brown knows it’s part of California.

  52. leigh says:

    Congratulations on the new digs,Lee! May your roads not be crunchy with the granola of hippies and wannabe Injuns.

    Cabela’s is proud of their stock. Make friends with the hermit (there’s always one in them thar hills) and see if there is something more local and maybe barterable. Yes, I made up a word, there.

Comments are closed.